South Carolina Republican Sen. James Demint called the decision [overturning California's Prop. 8] "another attempt to impose a secular immorality on the American people who keep voting to preserve traditional marriage."

"Traditional marriage has been the foundation of civil society for centuries and we cannot simply toss it aside to fit the political whims of liberal activists with gavels," Demint said.

Your laws should be secular according to your own constitution, so complaining about it makes you anti-American, now doesn't it, buddy.

Besides, just look at countries that allow gay marriage and see just how bad they are doing (hint: they are doing just fine and the only thing you'll notice is some very happy gays with wedding rings on).

"South Carolina Republican Sen. James Demint called the decision [overturning California's Prop. 8] "another attempt to impose a secular immorality on the American people who keep voting to preserve traditional marriage."

And for the rest of normal, decent, law-abiding, tolerant society on Planet Reality, that's a bad thing... how?

With emphasis on law-abiding.

"Traditional marriage has been the foundation of civil society for centuries"

We in the UK have had Civil Partnerships for years now. It's affected the foundation of our civil society precisely this much:

Zero.

"and we cannot simply toss it aside to fit the political whims of liberal activists with gavels,"

Those 'liberal activists with gavels' are the bedrock of the foundations of civil society: The rule of law. Besides, by saying what you are, you're disobeying your very own Scripture, the literal 'Word of God'.

Do I have to remind you of Romans 13:1-7?

And last time I heard, it's your very own government who appoints Supreme Court Justices.

Unless you're prepared to completely agree with President Obama's policies and thus the decisions of said SCOTUS, then you've just punched your own one-way ticket to Hell.

we cannot simply toss it aside to fit the political whims of liberal activists with gavels

No, but we can toss it aside with a 50% divorce rate, shows like "The Bachelor" where a guy picks a woman to marry after getting to know her for a couple weeks and then divorcing after a quickie marriage, and people happily living together as a couple raising children without feeling the need to sign a piece of paper.

For centuries "traditional marriage" was a means to tie two families/countries together, for property reasons, or to gain dowry money. Often, the couple had no say in the matter and one could be 53 while the other was 12.

How is wanting to tie yourself to another person for life an immorality? Isn't living together without marrying more immoral to you people?
I feel just as married after we got gender-neutral marriage laws, as I was before.

I think you have mistaken. If i wanted to wreck the foundation of civil society, i would attack the rights of man, not some silly little civil contract. Now, are you one of those people who would overturn 14th amendment because brown people?

It's true: the American people do keep voting to maintain a definition of marriage that consists of one man and one woman. That tells you a lot about how easily misled the American people really are, and makes a strong argument that voters really should pay close attention to the actual nature of what they're voting for and not a 60-second TV or radio commercial in favor of or in opposed to whatever it is the ad attempts to do.

...and we cannot simply toss it aside to fit the political whims of liberal activists with gavels,"

This judge was appointed by Reagan, Senator, and not without a struggle--some opposed him on the grounds that they thought he was too conservative.

Yes, this judge is apparently openly homosexual. That does not make him an activist, nor does it negate his ruling. The fact that you think that it should says volumes about your understanding of civil rights--and about your character.

Prop 8 was thrown out because it relegated one class of citizens to unequal status--without due process of law--based on nothing but the prejudices and bigotry of another group of citizens. Those aren't "whims", Senator.

Traditional marriage was whatever the fuck people wanted it to be; a man and a woman, a man and several women, a man, several women, and a few concubines, etc. It was simply a social contract between people that had no tax bonuses and was used to ensure inheritance.

How is it we're tossing "traditional marriage" aside? I'm a straight man, I've been married to a straight woman in the "traditional" way for the last 3 years. I live in Massachusetts where gay marriage is legal. Hundreds of gay marriages have happened here since the start of my marriage and for some strange unfathomable reason, none of those marriages have had any impact whatsoever on mine.

Fundies want to have "freedom" of choice. They want to make their choices... and yours too.